Impact of Covid-19 on Homelessness and Rough Sleeping

Murad Qureshi: May I congratulate the Mayor on his important achievements to support those Londoners that were rough sleeping during the pandemic. What progress has been made over the summer and what further steps are you taking to support Londoners who are sleeping rough as we head towards winter?

Sadiq Khan: Can I thank the AssemblyMember for his comments in his question? The approach pioneered in London was a monumental effort by all concerned, not only the GLA but also boroughs, our charity partners, hoteliers and other businesses. Together with the boroughs we have safely accommodated more than 4,000 homeless people across the city during the pandemic, including over 1,600 in the GLA‑procured hotels, keeping the rate of COVID-19 infection among London’s rough sleepers far below that seen in other world cities. I will give you one example. London’s rate of infection amongst rough sleepers was about 3 to 4%; it was 66% in San Francisco.
The boroughs and my team are now implementing my In For Good policy and our charity partners have so far supported more than 2,000 people to positively move on, 550 of whom were from City‑Hall‑procured hotels. Some of these people were entrenched rough sleepers who had slept out for many years, demonstrating the transformative impact of this operation on so many people’s lives. I am also taking steps to tailor our services so they are fit for current circumstances.
I am now very mindful of a possible second wave and the potential need to act again rapidly to provide accommodation and support to ensure rough sleepers and safe and infection rates are minimised. We need to be able to plan for this now and I have written, jointly with London Councils, to the Secretary of State urging him to commit to supporting us to do so.
With numbers on the streets rising fast, we are also urging the Government to take measures around the private rented sector and welfare to prevent further homelessness and rough sleeping. The Government also urgently needs to introduce protection for non‑UK national rough sleepers by suspending the habitual residence test and the no recourse to public funds condition, and to provide clear guidance to local authorities around the provision of emergency accommodation regardless of immigration status.

Murad Qureshi: Thank you, MrMayor, for the response. You are right that Everyone campaign has been a success, yet the latest Combined Homelessness and Information Network (CHAIN) data does show that there are a third more rough sleepers from last year, particularly in our outer London boroughs. Barking and Dagenham, for example, has seen - would you believe it - a 933% increase. Following from your recent letter of 7[September2020], has the Government committed to providing the additional money needed for emergency accommodation and support for the potential second wave?

Sadiq Khan: Can I say, Chair, this is a really good example of the Member being assiduous in his preparation. I received this morning the answer to your question from the Government. They announced this morning the allocation. What they have said is the total allocation for London - that is the boroughs and the GLA - is £43million, of which the GLA will receive £19million. That means we can continue to help over this difficult period. We are pleased the Government has given us this investment, which means we will work with our partners over the next period.

Murad Qureshi: Thank you, MrMayor, for giving us the latest information on that front. I think there is a particular case in central London, in boroughs like the City of Westminster, where homeless Londoners have ballooned by a fifth. I was thinking of the potential of some public buildings - nearby me, for example, Paddington Green Police Station, which has been lying idle for a number of years and probably will do for a few more years - and whether they could be used for emergency accommodation as well in central London. You may not be able to respond now, MrMayor, but I have written to you as well. I am mindful there is still not only an outer London problem but a central London problem.

Sadiq Khan: Can I say a couple of things? Firstly, because those who have no recourse to public funds are still increasing in terms of those on our streets, you are right, there is going to be a big need for innovative solutions. We are talking to any person who owns a spare building to see if we can use their space, including ones we own. You will be aware of the fire station in Islington that we used to home rough sleepers. I will wait to receive the letter from the AssemblyMember. We are always looking at our own premises, but also other premises, if they are vacant to see if they can be safely used.

Murad Qureshi: OK, I will look forward to the response from your team. Can I finally come to what you raised earlier? You signed up to Generation Rent’s calling for a rent freeze. We are all obviously anxious that people in private rented could be pushed on. How long do you think the moratorium on evictions should be extended for, given it is going to be ending on 20[September2020]?

Sadiq Khan: I think 20September is too short. The good news is the Government has moved in relation to the six months’ notice, which is good. The issue is in relation to arrears that have accrued. What we are saying to the Government is there is a package of things they can do. For example, any rent arrears because of COVID should not be used as a section8 reason for eviction, and the other things in my letter in relation to discretionary housing payments and the rest. Some other countries in Europe have a far longer extension in relation to evictions. There are good reasons to want to get rid of a tenant, so we are not saying never ever in the future can a landlord remove a tenant. However, my letter sets out a number of things the Government can do that will alleviate the anxiety that Londoners who are renting are currently facing.

Murad Qureshi: Thank you very much, MrMayor.

Budget repurposing

Susan Hall: What were your guiding principles and priorities when repurposing your 2020-21 budget?

Sadiq Khan: The GLA budget for 2020/21 was set in early 2020 before the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic could have been predicted. The economic downturn is having a massive impact on finances across the GLA Group, just as it has on many organisations, sectors and local authorities across the country. We are facing the perfect storm of increased costs associated with responding to the crisis combined with a near total collapse in revenue. TfL’s income from fares dropped by more than 90% during lockdown and revenue from local business rates and council tax has fallen off a cliff. As a result, the GLA, the MPS and the London Fire Brigade will be forced to make cuts of nearly £500million over the next two years to cover the budget shortfall. The Government has announced some support for local authorities to cover revenue losses but it is unlikely these proposals will be anywhere near sufficient to meet the shortfalls that all levels of regional and local government are seeing as a result of the crisis.
The overarching principle of the GLA budget review was to support London’s recovery from the pandemic while protecting the key projects and programmes that Londoners rely on. The exercise was guided by principles set out by the London Recovery Board, which I co-chair with the Chair of London Councils. They are to reverse the pattern of rising unemployment and lost economic growth caused by the economic scarring of COVID-19; to support our communities, including those most impacted by the virus; to keep young people safe and provide further opportunities; narrow social, economic and health inequalities; and delivery of a cleaner and greener London. As well as protecting existing projects and programmes we created a recovery fund of £6.6million from existing resources to ensure that the GLA has the flexibility to respond to emerging priorities. I have also taken a pay cut, and outlined proposals to save around £55million by relocating City Hall.
I will do everything I can to protect frontline services by making savings and using the reserves we prudently built up before the pandemic hit. However, the Government has a clear choice: invest in London’s economic recovery to avoid cuts and to help families and communities get back on track, or introduce a new era of austerity that will choke our growth and hit our vital public services, including the public, at the worst possible time.

Susan Hall: Thank you, MrMayor. Obviously we are going to look in far more detail at these various things and the Budget Committee is coming up. I will take on board what you have said and we will look at that further.
In the meantime, if I can just ask a couple of questions? One of the savings outlined in Mayoral Decision 2666 is £1.25million from the New Year’s Eve celebration. What is the current thinking around that celebration at the moment, with that sort of money removed from it?

Sadiq Khan: We are still looking into that. I sent an instruction out to try to save money across the piece where we can. As the Chair of the relevant Committee highlighted, we have already found some money from there. We will continue to find savings elsewhere. We have not yet finalised plans for what we will do instead of the fireworks on New Year’s Eve. You will be aware, AssemblyMemberHall, how important it is for our global reputation, bearing in mind the coverage around the world, to do something. As soon as we finalise plans I will share them with the Assembly, as indeed with Londoners.

Susan Hall: OK, because obviously it may have an impact on some of the councils, Westminster, etc. Any idea when you might be able to firm that up?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, I would be disappointed if it was not in the next few weeks. Why do I not contact AssemblyMemberHall’s office later on today to let her know when that will be, if that is acceptable?

Susan Hall: That is very acceptable, thank you very much. This same report also mentions a £3million saving on staff through not recruiting to vacant roles, but it does suggest that this may have an impact on mayoral programmes and projects. Which projects do you think this will impact the most?

Sadiq Khan: Thanks for that question. Yes, you are right, I have set out as part of that Mayoral Decision salary savings of £3million. We have already reduced 71 programmes. We have made reductions in 71 programmes, including six that have had their funding removed for 2020/21. Again, Chair, I can, if the AssemblyMember wants me to do so, get my team to drop her a note in relation to the specifics if that will help her.

Susan Hall: That really would. I would be really grateful if we could have that quite soon so we can get a picture of this. Thank you, MrMayor.
Clearly some things should have happened during this period of time which have not and clearly there are going to be a lot of unexpected costs because of the impact of COVID. What do you think is a ballpark figure here, a plus or a minus, that will be left in budgetary terms?

Sadiq Khan: I am not sure if I follow, Chair.

Navin Shah: Could you repeat?

Susan Hall: OK, that is probably my fault. During this pandemic clearly there are things that we have not done, so money has been saved. There are various different programmes which you are more than aware of. I equally accept that there must be unexpected costs that have arisen. Looking at it just very, very generally and with a very ballpark figure, are we at a plus or a minus, if you want to put it in those sorts of basic terms?

Sadiq Khan: I get the question now. I think we are at a plus, not a minus. I will tell you why, AssemblyMemberHall. We are using some of our reserves to help with the minuses. The reason why I say I think we are at a plus is to think about the events organised in Trafalgar Square now that we would have done but for COVID - they are just some examples - or some of the other programmes we would have done but we cannot because of social distancing. Again, I am more than happy, Chair, in the note I send the AssemblyMember to give her some idea of where we are now, almost like a running commentary, a ‘run rate’. Obviously that might change between now and the financial year.

Susan Hall: Yes, I totally understand that. That would be very, very helpful for us going forward with our Budget[and Performance Committee] meetings. Do you have a ballpark figure that you think we might be slightly in a plus?

Sadiq Khan: A lot of the savings we have identified already were used, as you have suggested. I cannot give you the figure now but you will know what I have tried to do is get the GLA to try to make as many savings as we can to avoid the frontline MPS and fire service having to make in-year savings. Again, I can drop you a note in relation to the ‘run rate’.
However, as you alluded to in your previous question, there could be more expenditure because of unforeseen things, particularly with a second wave. One thing to add there, which is worth you being aware of, is around homelessness. We, for example, have directed some of the money that we saved or that was in the reserves around homelessness. With the weather getting worse and a potential second wave, for example, there could be more expenditure there than would otherwise be the case. You have to take the ‘run rate’ with a pinch of salt because it could fall behind over the next few weeks and months.

Susan Hall: I totally understand that and I am very, very happy to hear that you might protect the police and the fire brigade. As you know, the blue light services are a passion of myself and many Londoners. I will leave it at that. Thank you very much, MrMayor.
Navin Shah AM (Chair): MrMayor, I have a request from other Members. If you can circulate your correspondence on what you have just committed to to all Members, please?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Yes, Chair. The note we do to AssemblyMemberHall, I am more than happy to CC the entire Assembly, for obvious reasons. Apologies, I should have said that.

Public health after Public Health England

Onkar Sahota: What does the scrapping of PHE and the establishment of a new National Institute for Health Protection mean for health protection and promotion in London?

Sadiq Khan: Like the rest of the country, London remains in the midst of a public health emergency. With COVID-19 cases on the rise, we must remain vigilant to the risk of a deadly second wave. Choosing this moment for a reorganisation of the nation’s public health body is a huge distraction. It risks the Government losing focus on the vital task of keeping people safe. All the Government’s energy should be directed at increasing the availability of testing and enhancing contact tracing. It is unacceptable that Londoners cannot get a test or are having to travel miles and wait days for a test.
This kind of chaos has been an all-too-common feature of this pandemic. Shifting the blame from the Minister responsible to public health officials will not fool Londoners. The Government must admit its own mistakes and show the leadership needed to get the virus under control.
I have already written to the Secretary of State [for Health and Social Care] to ask for urgent clarity on what the changes could mean for London. I continue to meet at least weekly with Public Health England’s (PHE) Regional Director for London, ProfessorKevinFenton, and I have also met with BaronessHarding, Chair of the new National Institute for Health Protection. I am seeking urgent clarity on how support for health improvement in London will continue.
I am proud of the strong track record of close working between City Hall and PHE from our shared determination to tackle London’s health inequalities to our work on School Superzones, mental health, child obesity and improving air quality. This important work must continue and be built upon as we look ahead to recovering from the pandemic and a healthier, fairer and happier future for Londoners.

Onkar Sahota: Thank you, MrMayor, for that response. Of course, the crisis at the moment is about the test, trace and isolate system failing. The unsung heroes of this pandemic have been the local public health directors, who have been forgotten as the Government has put all the contracts for the testing with the big laboratories.
What do you think can be done in London to increase the capacity of the laboratories? The limiting aspect is not the number of swabs. We have enough swabs around. The problem is that the Government has put out the contracts to the private sector, to five mega laboratories, to do all the testing and they are beyond their capacity. We are taking 250,000 swabs every day, but the capacity of the laboratories is only 200,000. What can we do in London to make sure that the universities and the hospitals are collaborating in the testing of the swabs?

Sadiq Khan: You raise a really important point. You will also be aware of swabs that have been wasted, or have been sent abroad and been wasted. We are working with colleagues in PHE who have offered up not just the expertise of MedCity but the life sciences sector in London. You will be pleased to know that a number of London businesses, laboratories and universities are working closely with the Department for Health and public health colleagues to try to increase capacity as well. That offer has been there for some time. I was reassured in a meeting I had last week that the relevant Government team is looking at exploring any further opportunities to scale up lab usage in London, and there are also labs just outside London - around Oxford, in that area - that we are also assisting with as well.
Dr Onkar Sahota AM: Thank you, MrMayor. The other thing, which you also mentioned earlier on, is that this is the wrong time for this mobilisation. In fact, the Secretary of State for Health, [The Rt Hon] MattHancock [MP], said that he wanted a levelling‑up of inequalities in preventative health as a vital part. He said it must be embedded right across the Government, in the NHS in primary care and pharmacies.
Let me tell you, public health was part of the NHS until it was disrupted and taken out of it in 2012. Do you think that this disruption has taken the focus away from COVID-19 and making sure that we also do address inequalities, not just health protection?

Sadiq Khan: There is a certain sense that you have to admire the audacity of this Government that undertook one of the biggest reorganisations in the NHS in 2012. People like you, experts in this field, campaigned against that. They starved PHE of resources over the last eight years, hollowed them out, and now have the audacity to criticise PHE and the lack of resources and capacity it has. They are now embarking on another reorganisation at a time when we face a major health, economic and social crisis. It just beggars belief. We have to be careful that we do not allow this to deflect from getting a grip on the virus. I know you are working incredibly hard, not just being an Assembly Member but also when you are working for the NHS. We have to make sure we do not allow a reorganisation to detract from the really important work of getting a grip on this virus.
Dr Onkar Sahota AM: Finally, the Director of the London area of PHE, ProfessorFenton, was your Statutory Health Advisor. Will there be a London‑wide office for the new National Institute for Health Protection and will its Director be your Statutory Health Advisor?

Sadiq Khan: That is a good question, I am not sure of the answer to that. I have written to the relevant people in Government to get an answer to that. I think ProfessorKevinFenton is doing a great job. I get huge benefit from him being my Statutory Health Advisor. I am told that there should be no major issues in relation to that continuing, but I have not had that confirmed in writing yet. You are asking the sort of question that we asked when we first discovered this.
I will make this point. Some really hard‑working and dedicated experts and workers in PHE only discovered through the media they were being restructured. They have lots of issues, are very concerned and anxious about their future jobs and their future careers. I want to again thank them for their hard work during the recent past dealing with this pandemic. I want them to know this, as far as I am concerned, is no reflection on my respect for them and thanks for the hard work they have done over the last few months.
Dr Onkar Sahota AM: I echo your comments, MrMayor, and thank you very much for your answers.

Getting London Moving

Keith Prince: Are you doing all that you can to get London moving?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, I am committed to helping London recover and getting the city moving again in a way that is both safe and sustainable. In doing so, I am unapologetic that we will not do anything that puts Londoners at risk from a disastrous second wave of the virus.
TfL is running a basically normal service and has been doing so for some time. This is helping to enable social distancing and is giving more people the confidence to travel. All stations that needed to close during the lockdown, with the exception of Heathrow Terminal4, have reopened. Ridership is around 35% of normal levels on the Tube compared to 5% at the peak of lockdown, and 57% on buses compared to 15% during the lockdown.
Londoners have made it clear they want a safe, clean, reliable and well‑organised network and this is exactly what we are providing. TfL is putting in clear signage at stations and one‑way queuing systems, and we are seeing a high uptake of Londoners wearing face coverings. Hundreds of extra buses have also been provided as part of huge changes to the operation of the bus network to ensure that schoolchildren can safely return to school. Our ambitious Streetspace programme is also creating more space for people to safely walk or cycle. This programme has delivered over 20,000square metres of extra pedestrian space and 60kilometres of new or upgraded cycle lanes that are either complete or under construction. There is lots we have been able to do to help people get to work, school and around town when they choose to.
The limited numbers we have seen return to the office has nothing to do with the travel offer available to them, which is quite clear. What Londoners want is a COVID test that is effective and a contact tracing system that works. I will not allow the focus to be shifted to bogus arguments about transport capacity when there is complete disarray on the issue of testing, which Londoners really care about.
I am confident that when Londoners feel it is safe for them to return to the city and transport, London’s transport network is ready to welcome them.

Keith Prince: Thank you for that answer, MrMayor. Could you tell me how long do you think is reasonable or fair for a council to consult with residents before implementing a low‑traffic neighbourhood scheme?

Sadiq Khan: The Government passed legislation that said councils do not need to - in fact encouraged them not to - formally consult. Engage, yes, and some councils are engaging. What the Government was keen to do was to release the money to councils so they could have their low‑traffic neighbourhoods up and running as soon as possible to assist to avoid a car‑led recovery. There are other things we are doing with TfL. Councils were encouraged by the Government to move pretty quickly.

Keith Prince: OK. Can I use your terminology then, MrMayor? How long do you think is reasonable to engage? Do you think that six days is a reasonable time to engage with residents or do you think it should be a little longer than that?

Sadiq Khan: It depends on the council and the scheme. I will give you an example. Some councils have previously consulted on schemes but have not had the funding to do them. What the Government is doing is giving funding and saying, “No need to consult”, so the councils can go pretty briskly. There are other councils that have been awful - like Wandsworth in south London - that literally overnight did things that residents found objectionable because at the same time there were changes being made on the main road, around school streets and the rest. Therefore, I think it depends which council we are talking about, which part of London and which scheme.

Keith Prince: OK. Would you say that six days is reasonable? What would you say to Andyin Barkingside, who now has to drive 25 minutes in order to park his car in his garage, and what would you say to Warren, who now has to walk for seven minutes with a bad foot to get his prescription from the pharmacy, with them having only been given six days’ notice of a scheme being implemented? What do you have to say to them, Mr Mayor?

Sadiq Khan: This is one of the challenges. I laud the Government’s intention. I think the Government is right to avoid a car‑led recovery. The Government is absolutely right that we do not want to see what we see in other parts of the world, where people, for obvious reasons, are nervous about using public transport and it is difficult for them to walk or cycle, so they jump back in their car. That is why I support the Government’s moves to invest in more walking, more cycling and provide almost 100% capacity on public transport. If the two constituents you refer to, Andy and Warren, have issues with their local scheme or their local borough, I would expect them to raise it with their local borough. There are examples of boroughs tweaking and amending schemes where it is possible to do so. The key thing is to discourage people from jumping into their car if they can avoid doing so.

Keith Prince: You have not really answered that, but thank you anyway. MrMayor, in relation to Bishopsgate, the Deputy Mayor for Transport shared with us that you have identified in the Equalities Impact Assessment that the implementation of the scheme will cause, and in fact has caused, a significant increase in journey times and cost to disabled people. Will you please, MrMayor, do an assessment as to what those actual times and costs are? Having identified that the schemes are going to cause this inconsideration to the disabled - and as you said earlier yourself, with the best intentions we need to be careful not to inadvertently make things bad for disabled Londoners, which clearly this scheme has - would you press TfL to do the assessment on how much this is going to cost disabled people and how much extra time this will add to their journey so that Londoners can see what damage this is doing to disabled people please?

Sadiq Khan: Firstly, I am not sure if your characterisation of what the Deputy Mayor for Transport shared with you is accurate. Yes, there was an Equality Impact Assessment done in relation to the Bishopsgate scheme. Many of the concerns that you articulate were not quite as you say they were. The scheme will be kept under review. They are temporary proposals. We will make sure that we review these proposals to make sure they do not disadvantage disabled Londoners, which we are obviously keen to make sure we have‑‑

Keith Prince: Will you do an assessment to calculate the extra cost and the extra time that this scheme is burdening disabled people with, please?

Sadiq Khan: There has been an Equality Impact Assessment and those assessments are viewed‑‑

Keith Prince: Will you do an assessment please, MrMayor, to calculate the extra cost, extra time and inconvenience to disabled people?

Sadiq Khan: I think KeithPrince is in danger of copying the bad habits of AndrewBoff[AM]. The question that was asked‑‑

Keith Prince: Sorry, MrMayor. Normally we tend to get on fairly well on these things, but you only have to say yes or no, MrMayor. We are running out of time so yes or no, please.

Sadiq Khan: With respect, it is for me to decide how I answer the question, not for you to dictate how I answer the question. I do not dictate how you ask the question; you should not dictate how I answer the question.

Keith Prince: I am not dictating anything, I am asking you for a yes or no, MrMayor.

High rise firefighting after Grenfell

Andrew Dismore: Please provide an update on the design and implementation of LFB’s PN633.

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): As part of the response to the recommendations of the Phase 1 Report into Grenfell Tower, London Fire Brigade revised its policy known as PN633 on high rise firefighting. This document sets out the procedures firefighters should follow when responding to a fire in a high rise building and importantly covers operational tactics for use in exceptional circumstances when a building is not behaving as expected.
The Brigade has now begun training on this and two other key high rise policies, Fire Survival Guidance and Evacuation and Rescue. This is an operational decision by the London Fire Commissioner, Andy Roe, which will help mitigate the risk to the public. These policies are planned to go live upon completion of training on 21March2021 and will involve every operational member of staff.
Training prior to the go-live date will have three elements: computer based training, with online assessment to confirm understanding, face-to-face training with facilitated workshops used to explore key areas, and a guided learning exercise to consolidate learning from the three policies. The policies will not go live until 80% of all operational control staff have completed the computer-based training packages and taken part in an appropriate high rise exercise.
Following the policies going live, there will be extensive practical exercises carried out across London. Work started on the development of the high rise policy in November2017. Formal consultation began with the Fire Brigades Union (FBU) in December2018. Consultation with the FBU continues and the policies remain under continual review during the training period.
Andrew Dismore AM: Thank you for that full answer, MrMayor. Sending firefighters above the bridgehead into potentially toxic smoke and fume-filled environments before starting up their breathing apparatus (BA) departs from years of safe practice guidance. As PN633 states, “This is an extremely high risk activity.” The FBU have suggested alternatives like altering the flow rate BA sets, making greater use of extended duration BA, and testing pure oxygen sets. Can you reassure us that all possible options are being considered in the development of new high rise firefighting procedures, and what do you say to firefighters who will have to carry out the new policy?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Firstly, can I, through you, thank our firefighters for the amazing work they do day in, day out? Also, I share with you concerns about not simply the safety of the public but, as you infer, the safety of our firefighters. We owe duty of care to our firefighters, not just to make sure we provide them with the right kit and the right training, but to make sure they are safe.
Can I just reassure you that the Fire Commissioner, who is in charge of operational matters, is taking on board all of these issues that you raise? He is working really closely with firefighters, including with the FBU, who do a brilliant job doing advocacy on behalf of their firefighters, and will address the concerns you have alluded to in relation to firefighters carrying out the policy, those above the bridgehead and the concerns around the extended duration, the way to use breathing apparatus and testing, pure oxygen tests. I can reassure you Andy Roe is fully aware of this.
What I can do, Chair, is ask the Commissioner to liaise directly with the AssemblyMember, who I know is in touch with firefighters on a daily basis, to try and address any issues he has, so he has the confidence that the Fire Brigade takes its responsibility to our firefighters really seriously.
Andrew Dismore AM: Thank you for that. Of course, the real answer is to ensure that dangerous ACM cladding and other dangerous cladding is removed from all tall buildings and indeed all buildings where vulnerable people may be, like care homes, so that firefighters do not have to risk their health and their lives tackling fires and evacuating people from such dangerous places. The [House of] Commons Public Accounts Committee yesterday published a scathing report on the Government’s appallingly slow progress in remediating dangerous cladding and in failing to support residents, many of whom face huge bills. What can you do to encourage swifter action to make sure homes are safe for the Londoners who live in them?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I welcome the report from the Public Accounts Community, who always do serious pieces of work. The AssemblyMember is absolutely right. The reason we are having these challenges is because the staple advice cannot be safely used in buildings that are at risk. We saw the awful consequences with Grenfell Tower. That is why the AssemblyMember is right to say that what we have to do is get these buildings sorted out as soon as possible to avoid risk to those residents who live there, those in neighbouring residences, and firefighters as well. We continue to work closely with the Government and the relevant Minister to put pressure on the building owners. You will be aware that many of these buildings are in London, a disproportionate number. I continue to work with central Government, the fire service, firefighters, and Londoners, including the Grenfell community, to make progress in this area which is causing real concern.

Ultra Low Emission Zone

Caroline Pidgeon: What will success look like for the Ultra Low Emission Zone extension?

Sadiq Khan: Success for the ULEZ will be a healthier, more liveable and more equal city. Every Londoner deserves to breathe clean air and the ULEZ expansion is a vital part of our work to reduce the number of dirty, polluting vehicles on our roads, to provide cleaner air for our children to breathe and to improve health outcomes for all Londoners.
The central London ULEZ introduced in April2019 has already led to immediate health benefits with fewer polluting cars and roadside NO2 reduced by 36% in the ULEZ. The number of vehicles that meet the tougher emission standards has risen from 39% in February2017 to more than 80% now.
Despite this significant progress, large areas of our city still do not meet legal pollution limits and we are a long way off meeting WHO-recommended targets. We face a climate emergency that requires an urgent response. Thousands of deaths in the capital each year are attributed to poor air quality, while emerging evidence suggests there is a link between pollution, higher rates of infection and worse recovery from coronavirus. All these issues disproportionately affect Londoners who are worse off and those from BAME communities.
When London recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic, we must not simply replace one public health crisis with another. The expansion of the ULEZ and the tightening of Low Emission Zone (LEZ) standards is expected to see reductions in pollution in nearly all areas of London, including the boundary route of the expanded LEZ to the North and South Circular Roads. Remaining hotspots will be addressed through targeted local measures.
Our policies to reduce emissions including the ULEZ will help us avoid over 250,000 new cases of disease and over 1million hospital admissions London-wide by 2050, saving the National Health Service (NHS) and the social care system nearly £5billion.

Caroline Pidgeon: Thank you very much for your reply. I have been for many years a strong supporter of the ULEZ, as has my party, and I strongly agree with your decision to extend the coverage.
When the Congestion Charge started in February2003 it used camera technology. While it was seen as really innovative at the time, in some respects that technology is now outdated. I understand that the ULEZ extension will still operate by camera technology. Are you satisfied that you have futureproofed the technology in your contact?

Sadiq Khan: I should put on the record my thanks for the consistent support from Caroline and her team.
Yes, we are looking into the futureproofing of all technology. We do not want to spend lots of money and then it be out of date. One of the things we are doing is looking at - you are right - increasing the amount of automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) to support us. There are more cameras being put up in the expanded zone. We are keen to make sure that we can get the expansion successful and to futureproof it, for example, to make sure we are not spending money on technology that could be redundant in a few years’ time with advances in apps and all the rest of it. We will keep this under review.
At the moment, the most effective way is the expansion of the ANPR cameras. Also, just to reassure you - I know it is an issue that you are concerned about, as indeed I am - we are making sure that any privacy issues are addressed by working with the Information Commissioner and data privacy experts as well.

Caroline Pidgeon: Thank you. I want to be sure that with the extension of the ULEZ you really are planning ahead and ensuring the technology can be flexible and adapt to new challenges in tackling congestion and pollution on London’s roads.
When will the contract that has been signed by TfL be published so that we can assess your plans?

Sadiq Khan: I am not aware. Can I look into that and write back to you and let you know‑‑

Caroline Pidgeon: We have seen in the summer that a contract was signed, I believe, with Capita but it has not been published yet.

Sadiq Khan: Chair, through you, can I write back to the Member to give her the answer? I am not aware of having that information with me, but I will write back to her and let her know.

Caroline Pidgeon: Thank you. There are many questions that we would want to have answers to. For example, will the cameras be able to specifically monitor the individual pollution levels created by each vehicle? I know the technology now exists. Will the new technology be able to monitor excessive noise from vehicles, as we have seen introduced in places like Paris? Most importantly, will the extension of the ULEZ allow a move to smart road pricing at some point where people are charged for the length of their journeys and the level of pollution their vehicles are creating rather than bluntly entering a zone and crossing a line?

Sadiq Khan: It is really important to avoid any misunderstanding. Nowhere in the world is a ULEZ of the scale of ours being tried. You mentioned Paris. Paris has a couple of roads, I would say, with respect to Paris, rather than the scheme we are talking about. We are talking about‑‑

Caroline Pidgeon: They are doing noise, yes.

Sadiq Khan: You are talking about technology that can be expanded up to the North Circular and South Circular. At the moment, the only technology we have that can be effective on this scale is the ANPR. It does not address the complexities that you would like us to, but we are exploring whether it is possible to do so on the scale we want to do. The scale is not just the five boroughs in central London. It is going all the way to the North and South Circulars.

Caroline Pidgeon: Thank you for that. Finally, in relation to your van scrappage scheme for London’s small businesses, it was announced with just a day’s notice that it would be suspended on 28August [2020].
Can you clarify whether the scheme has now completely ended or whether there is going to be an alternative? What are small businesses supposed to do now to try to green their vehicles?

Sadiq Khan: The van scrappage scheme has been really successful. You will remember, we set aside £38million for that and the value of accepted applications is about that figure. We used up the money we had. You will remember. What we tried to do was to use it as a way to persuade the Government that a national scrappage scheme was the way forward. We put our money where our mouth is, just to show it can work.
What we are doing now is pivoting towards the bigger vehicles, which we are quite keen to clean up and which, as you know, are very polluting. The additional money we have is being targeted towards the larger vehicles. There is still money, I should say, through you, on the car and motorcycle scrappage scheme still available. That money is still there. That scrappage scheme still exists, but the focus now is to try to get bigger vehicles to be cleaner. There will be a scrappage scheme announced in relation to them in the near future.

Rising Anti-Social Behaviour and Violent Crime

Unmesh Desai: Calls to the Police relating to anti-social behaviour rose by over 160% during the first quarter of 2020/2021 and remain significantly higher than they were prior to the Covid-19 crisis. Violent crime has now also begun to rise sharply. How are you and the Met working to address these issues?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you, Chair. Keeping Londoners safe is my top priority and as Mayor I am determined to tackle violence and antisocial behaviour. I know the distress that antisocial behaviour can cause our communities. That is why I have made combatting it a mandatory priority for all London boroughs and increased the number of Dedicated Ward Officers in our neighbourhoods. It is true that during the early stages of lockdown there was an increase in antisocial behaviour calls, although much of this was related to reports of people not adhering to Government guidelines. While the number of calls is still slightly higher than the same time last year, they have reduced considerably compared to the peak in April. The Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis] has assured me that all officers are being encouraged to use the full range of powers to tackle antisocial behaviour when required.
Crime and violence fell as a result of lockdown but I was always clear that the causes of crime had not gone away. That is why the MPS has been working proactively through the Violent Crime Taskforce and the Violence Suppression Units, which are made up of 600 officers. Alongside this, we are continuing to address the underlying causes of crime. Through the Violence Reduction Unit, we have invested an additional £2.1million to support projects over the summer and autumn that are dedicated to improving the wellbeing and opportunities of vulnerable young people and their families. As Mayor, I will continue to make the case that now is not the time to make cuts but the time to invest in our youth services, to invest in our communities and to invest in our police.
Unmesh Desai AM: Thank you, Mr Mayor. MrMayor, there have been over 1,000 unlicensed music events since the end of June [2020] as London’s nightlife and music venues remained closed or restricted. These events not only cause significant disturbance to nearby residents but there have also been a number of incidents of serious violence occurring at them. How do you plan to deal with this issue specifically, which is likely to persist as nightlife venues remain closed?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): A really important question. You are absolutely right, unlicensed music events can be unsafe, with high levels of antisocial behaviour and illegal activity, and can end in violence. The police are working with councils and other key partners. Also, one of the things we have learnt, AssemblyMemberDesai, is that early intervention can be really useful and successful. I support the Government’s increase in fines - the £10,000 fine - which acts as a deterrent. The police will continue to take action against unlicensed music events taking place across our city for the reasons you and I both said.
Unmesh Desai AM: MrMayor, the Government also last week made an announcement that new COVID Marshals were going to be introduced across the country. This announcement has baffled both local councils and the police alike. In fact, it has absolutely baffled rank‑and‑file officers according to KenMarsh[Chair] of the Metropolitan Police Federation. It appears that Marshals will have no powers to properly enforce and there has been no funding announcement for councils to support their introduction.
Can you join me, MrMayor, in urging the Government to provide councils and police with more information on these Marshals in two respects, in particular their enforcement powers - as KenMarsh again said, it will not make any difference to enforcement if they do not have the ability to enforce - and also, secondly, to make sure that is not cash‑strapped councils that are to pick up the bill for the introduction of these Marshals?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Absolutely. Chair, can I say the way the AssemblyMember has asked his question illustrates the ridiculousness of this proposal from the Government around these Marshals. I have spoken to council leaders who are perplexed as to where these Marshals are going to come from and who is going to pay for them, aside from the practical problems identified by AssemblyMemberDesai around powers and all the rest of it. I will continue to try to find out what this means. None of us is any the wiser. It is another example of the confused communications and mixed messaging from this Government.
Unmesh Desai AM: MrMayor, thank you for your answers.

Covid-19 Review of Mayoral Policies

Andrew Boff: At our Health Committee on 12th August, Health inequalities specialist Professor Gurch Randhawa called for you to review your policies, including housing, in order to inject a greater public health approach into them. Nikki Morris, CEO of Age UK Camden has echoed that call so that you can take into account the mental health issues faced by people during lockdown and Vikki Nash, the Head of Policy and Campaigns at Mind, believes that housing is “absolutely key” to tackling Covid. Will you review your housing policies in the light of Lockdown?

Sadiq Khan: COVID-19 has highlighted links between health and London’s housing crisis. Too many Londoners live in unsuitable homes and the economic impacts of the pandemic mean many may face increased risk of homelessness. I am proud of our response to immediate housing needs during the pandemic, particularly our work to accommodate those sleeping on the streets. However, the pandemic has reinforced the urgent need to tackle the root causes of the housing crisis. We cannot do this without building more homes. That is why I have prioritised delivering record numbers of social rented and other genuinely affordable homes, over 17,000 in 2019/20, a record. While I have no formal powers over the private rented sector, I am working to improve standards for renters, for example, through my Better Renting Programme.
My London Plan aims to ensure that new social housing helps tackle overcrowding, requiring for the first time that boroughs outline the size mix of social housing needed locally and we are making progress. The proportion of new socially rented homes that were family sized increased from 34% in 2015/16 to 41% in 2018/19. The London Plan is one of the main tools I have to reduce overcrowding and the Government’s delay in approving it is holding back the progress I can make on this issue.
Government policies are also actively undermining our efforts to deliver high‑quality homes. I am astonished that during a crisis that underscores the importance of good quality housing more than ever before Ministers have responded by extending loopholes that allow offices and shops to be turned into substandard micro‑flats without planning permission. London’s housing crisis will never be solved by turning offices and shops into slums. Instead, we need a significant increase in Government funding to deliver the high‑quality genuinely affordable homes that Londoners need, namely £4.9billion a year, yet Ministers have only offered London £4billion over five years through the new Affordable Housing Programme. The welfare system also contributes to making housing unaffordable for Londoners with low incomes. By scrapping the benefit cap, the Government could improve options for households that have to resort to cramming into homes smaller than they need.
I am doing all I can to tackle London’s housing crisis. I urge the Government to review its own policies to ensure that we have learnt from the pandemic in ways that can urgently improve housing conditions for Londoners.

Andrew Boff: Will you review your housing policies in the light of lockdown?

Sadiq Khan: We are always reviewing our policies, not just housing but others as well. We actually have not had the London Plan signed off yet, but all our policies are reviewed in light of the crisis. To reassure the Member, the work of the Transition Board and the Recovery Board may also lead to further reviews of the policies that we have.

Andrew Boff: When will you publish your review of housing policies?

Sadiq Khan: There will be no formal publication of a review unless one takes place. At the moment, the good news is that there is sufficient flexibility in the London Plan to not need a formal review. It has not been approved yet by the Secretary of State so you could not have a review anyway. As and when the Recovery Board and the Transition Board publish work, I am more than happy to share that with the Assembly, which may not get it otherwise.

Andrew Boff: You do not have to wait for the permission of the Secretary of State to start a review. I want to know when will the Assembly see the review of your housing policies. When will you divulge this review that you have just announced?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, the Member is in danger of putting words in my mouth, heaven forbid. We will have to wait for Twitter to see how it reinvents itself. What I said is we review all our policies, particularly in light of the pandemic. For example, I am more sure now than --

Andrew Boff: MrMayor, I am accepting that answer. I did listen. I heard what you said.

Sadiq Khan: Chair, there has to be‑‑

Andrew Boff: I just want to know when you are going to be publishing it.

Sadiq Khan: You asked me not to interrupt, Chair, and Members not to interrupt because of technology. I have to be able to answer my question.

Navin Shah: AssemblyMemberBoff, do you still want to come back?

Andrew Boff: I want to know when he will be publishing this review of his housing policies. You said you were reviewing them constantly. Perhaps you could reveal to the Assembly the state of that review and when you intend to publish the document that outlines that review. The people who particularly want to know this are, of course, the Labour Group, who, along with the rest of the Assembly, are called here to review your housing and planning policies in order to address overcrowding. I am just trying to get from you when that review will take place and what has happened. What have you reviewed?

Sadiq Khan: I will just check, Chair, it is my turn now?

Navin Shah: Yes, it is indeed.

Sadiq Khan: What we are doing is we are working closely with the Transition Board in relation to a variety of issues that are coming to light as lockdown is restricted. There is a separate piece of work in relation to the recovery, coming out of the pandemic. That looks at a whole host of issues in our city. One of them is reducing inequalities, which is linked with housing. The issues around COVID-19 and the exacerbation caused by it, particularly to BAME communities and other deprived communities, is not just around one area, it is across a number of policies. Therefore, what I would say to the AssemblyMember is as soon as the Transition Board finishes its work and as soon as the Recovery Board finishes its work, I am happy to share that with him. If there is a need to formally change any policies in City Hall, of course we will look into that.
The evidence I have so far is that the London Plan, albeit not signed off, is pretty flexible as it is. It addresses a number of these issues. You will be aware, Chair, for example, we are ahead of the curve in relation to our Environment Strategy of preserving the greenspace, and increasing to more than 50% across our city the National Park City Programme. You will be aware, Chair, we are ahead of the curve in relation to addressing obesity; one of the exacerbations is being overweight. I know the AssemblyMember opposed me banning advertising of junk food on public transport. It has now been confirmed from experts a public health approach, which is the one we have, is the best way to address pandemics like this one.

Andrew Boff: These are lovely statements, MrMayor. When? Not, “After this, after that”; is it going to be September, October, November, December? When will we see the review of your housing policy?

Sadiq Khan: I have not said that we are revising policies.

Andrew Boff: You have not said that you are going to review the housing policies? I thought you just said you are constantly reviewing them. When will see this review?

Navin Shah: AssemblyMemberBoff, can you please let MrMayor answer your comments you just made?

Andrew Boff: I am looking forward to an answer, Chair.

Navin Shah: MrMayor, please.

Sadiq Khan: It is my turn now?

Navin Shah: Yes.

Sadiq Khan: The Transition Board is work in progress. The Transition Board has not finished its work. It could be some time before it finishes its work. The expectation from [The Rt Hon] RobertJenrick [MP, Co-Chair, London Transition Board] is that the Transition Board should finish its work before the end of this year. In light of the second wave, I am not sure now that will finish this year. The Recovery Board is ongoing work and will not complete until later on next year. Notwithstanding that, we continue to put pressure on the Government to sign off the London Plan. We still, at the same time, will oppose the Government’s extension of permitted development, which would be catastrophic for quality housing in London. We can do more than one thing at a time. I think what the Member is after is a formal review of our housing policies, which is not happening.

Andrew Boff: There will be no review of the housing policies despite the unanimous view, including your Deputy Mayor, of the London AssemblyMembers. Despite the unanimous view of the London AssemblyMembers, you are not going to review them. Despite the experience people have had during lockdown - the overcrowding, the loss of loved ones, the spread of the disease - you are not going to review your housing policies, is that correct?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, we are going around in circles. There is a piece of work taking place in the Transition Board --

Andrew Boff: That is fine. Actually, MrMayor, you have answered, because if I let you go again you will just --
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Look, it does not work. You need to calm down and let me speak. Andrew, calm down. Calm down, man.

Andrew Boff: I will stop there because it is obvious --

Navin Shah: AssemblyMemberBoff‑‑

Andrew Boff: ‑‑ listen to the Assembly, not even your own Labour Assembly Members. Thank you, MrMayor.

Navin Shah: AssemblyMemberBoff, you made your point very clearly. Can we have comments from Mr Mayor, last time, and then I am going to give a ruling? Thank you.

Andrew Boff: No thanks.

Navin Shah: Please stop there, AssemblyMember. Sorry, MrMayor?

Sadiq Khan: He has left me speechless.

Navin Shah: Right. Look, let us move on, we had the reply from MrMayor --

Andrew Boff: I must talk more often then.

Navin Shah: ‑‑ can write to him if you are concerned and unhappy about it.

Sadiq Khan: You are so angry, Boff. Why are you always so angry?
Andrew Boff AM: Humanists do not get angry.

Navin Shah: AssemblyMemberBoff and MrMayor, we will stop here. DrSahota, you had indicated you wanted to come in on this question?

Exam results fiasco

Jennette Arnold: Although finally young Londoners were awarded the grades they deserve, the stress caused by the process has been profound, on top of the mental health toll of lockdown. How are your programmes such as Thrive LDN and the Young Londoners Fund supporting young people following the exam results fiasco?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Firstly, I want to congratulate students from across the capital who got their results this summer for their hard work and achievement in the worst possible circumstances. This fiasco could have been completely avoided if the Government had taken action months ago. They have failed our young people, their families, and teachers. COVID-19 has impacted the lives of our young people like nothing we have seen in a generation. You are right: we need to support them now more than ever.
Our Young Londoners Fund has already supported over 50,000 young people. This summer, I have invested a further £2.1million to help 15,000 more young Londoners over the next six months to boost their skills and improve their mental health. This includes projects like that delivered by Spiral Skills in Lambeth, which is improving mentoring and employer-based workshops for students leaving year 11, who missed the end of school and had little support with their transition to college.
As schools and colleges return, we anticipate an increase in student experiencing mental and emotional distress. Funded by the Young Londoners Fund, Thrive LDN’s Youth Mental Health First Aid Programme aims to have one trained mental health first aider in every state-funded school and college in London. It enables teachers and youth workers to develop knowledge, skills and confidence to have conversations about mental health and to spot the signs of poor mental health. We have also worked with the Healthy London Partnership to update the Mental Health in Schools Toolkit, which supports children with their emotional wellbeing and mental health. This, together with Thrive LDN and the Good Thinking digital mental health and wellbeing service, signpost teachers, youth workers, parents and students to a wide range of online and voluntary sector support, as well as clinical resources.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM: Can I say thank you, MrMayor, for that comprehensive answer and the work that you are committed to? We know education and that educational experience is just so important. I have said it before, education is our passport to us achieving all our potential. It is not just employability; it is about our sense of citizenship and sense of belonging.
My follow-up question to you, MrMayor. I would like to seek your assurance that a key aim of your historic - and I say ‘historic’ because history is about the moment as well - Commission for Diversity in the Public Realm will be recommendations as to how we can redress the incomplete picture of London’s BAME histories and contribution to this city and Britain’s economic, intellectual, artistic and scientific history. This approach, unlike the allegations levelled against you earlier today by another Assembly Member, is not, and I repeat, not about rewriting history or heritage, but about righting the lies and the racism that is embedded in much of the stories and images of our heritage and cultural life. I seek this assurance from you, Mayor, and I would like your word on it. Thank you very much.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Could I thank the AssemblyMember for her question? She will know, as well as I do, that for many young Londoners they lack ambition and aspiration because they feel that people like them cannot be successful, that they cannot reach the top jobs, they cannot do amazing things. We have to increase aspiration and ambition. The AssemblyMember will be aware of the phrase “you have to see it to be it”. Often, when you walk around our city, you cannot see people like JennetteArnold [OBE AM] reflected in murals, in statues, in the names of squares, in the names of streets. You can understand why young people do not aspire to be great Britons, although we know many great Britons have been BAME.
What we are doing, AssemblyMemberArnold, is making sure, in particular, our teachers have the tools they need feasibly put on their curriculum. We are also helping more of the junior and middle BAME teachers aspiring to be leaders and head teachers in their schools. It is so important in relation to education. Also, the Commission for Diversity in the Public Realm will be looking at the contribution made by women, by members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, plus (LGBTQ+) community, by those who are disabled, by those from the BAME community, and many others who are not reflected in the public realm. It is for others to explain why they feel so threatened by our public realm reflecting the contribution made by all of us.
Can I just say this, Chair, as somebody who is the father of two daughters? AssemblyMemberArnold is a role model to my daughters and I am really proud to call her a friend and a colleague. She is as patriotic as anybody else in this Chamber, who may be from a different party, a different gender, or a different race.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM: Thank you so much. I shall just leave by saying I am a proud, life-long patron of the women’s section of City Hall British Legion Branch. As an aside, MrMayor, I am always available for sit-ins. Thank you very much.

Streetspace and Healthy Streets

David Kurten: How will you ensure that your Streetspace and Healthy Streets programmes do not cause congestion on London’s roads?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): London has led the way globally with the rapid rollout of our Streetspace programme, making it easier and safer for Londoners to walk and cycle and taking pressure off public transport. We are opening up London streets to people, enabling them to rethink the way they travel around our city and not just shift their car journeys to new routes. This is already working. During lockdown, we saw increases in cycling. At weekends, we have seen increases over 170%.
It is imperative that we continue to focus on active travel and public transport, the most sustainable ways to travel, for those who can do so, in order to deliver a green, fair and prosperous recovery from COVID-19. With nearly half of London’s households not having access to a car and with cars owned disproportionately by wealthier households, it is vital we prioritise modes of travel that will enable the city to keep functioning safely and sustainably.
Even before COVID-19, London was under pressure. We have been exposed to poor quality air. Many Londoners were dependent on their cars to get around and health was suffering as a result. We are also live to the scale of the climate emergency that we face. Since the end of lockdown, on some roads in London, we have seen traffic meet and exceed pre-COVID-19 levels. That is why we are encouraging more Londoners to walk and cycle and to build confidence in public transport.

David Kurten: Good morning, MrMayor. That was a very interesting answer to my question. It was very interesting that you said that now in some places traffic levels have met and exceeded levels before the whole coronavirus situation took place. The reason for that is that you put in these so called Streetspace measures, which have narrowed the street space available for vehicles to travel on, and that includes buses, taxis and business vehicles. That is causing congestion, MrMayor. Will you accept that? Why have you done it and why are you continuing to do this?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Your analysis, I am afraid, is wrong. We predicted some time ago a car-led recovery because we saw it around the world. You will be aware that other places around the world are ahead of us in relation to the spread of the virus, because of the way the epidemiology has worked. We saw, for example, in the Far East, car-led recoveries. We were keen to avoid that. The Government deserve credit for also seeing that and seeking to avoid that, which is why they were invested - and we support them in this - in more walking, more cycling and to keep public transport running at decent levels.
One of the reasons why people are using their cars is because they have not yet been encouraged to walk and cycle, or because they cannot for very good reasons. We have to assist them to make sure that if they have to use their cars, they use cars that are zero emission, because it helps with air quality, or they use public transport when it is safe to do so. It is really important for that to happen. Even with a slight increase in traffic in London it leads to gridlock. The problem with gridlock is not simply bad quality air, it means our emergency services, it means our deliveries, and it means those who really need to use the roads cannot do so. That is why I would ask you to use any influence you have to avoid people using their cars if they can.
David Kurten AM: I am glad you acknowledge now that emergency vehicles and delivery vehicles are getting trapped in this congestion, and that this is happening and this is because of your Streetspace programme. MrMayor, you can say that I am wrong, but I am right. I am right, because I am in touch with Londoners and I listen to the many and not the few, as it seems that you might do, MrMayor.
There is one thing that is really disturbing about your Streetspace programmes and pop-up bicycle lanes. There are barriers everywhere, in many of these places, between the pavement and the curb side and the roads. This means that disabled people and wheelchair users who need to use buses and taxis are not able to get in buses and taxis. MrMayor, for example, how would you travel, if you wanted to get a taxi from, say, Borough High Street, where there are barriers, to ParkLane, where there are barriers as well, and you are in a wheelchair? You simply cannot do it. What would someone in that situation have to do? Can you give me an answer, MrMayor?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): There are a number of issues in your question. In relation to the barriers that you talk about in local authority streets, you asked what I would do. I would politely and courteously, not in an insulting, threatening or abusive way, lobby the council to look at the consequences of their policies and maybe suggest that they amend their policies, tweak them, or in some cases change their policies.
With some of the policies the council may, not unreasonably, want to give it some time to bed in. We saw in Waltham Forest, for example, a few years ago, huge uproar when Waltham Forest introduced some of their policies, not dissimilar to what has been introduced in some low traffic neighbourhoods, and lo and behold, a couple of years on, we have seen businesses flourishing and thriving. The evidence is the more people who walk and cycle the more people pop into their shops and shop there. Communities that were previously against their Mini-Hollands are now advocates for it. In fact, we have seen in the last few weeks some Londoners in some boroughs changing their minds in relation to being quite anti are now being quite positive. It takes some time for it to bed in.
There are a number of different things taking place across our city. There is Streetspace, which you referred to. There are School Streets across our city. These are streets outside schools. There is additionally, you will be aware, changes being made in relation to low traffic neighbourhoods, and there is additionally, you will be aware, increased cycling taking place as well.
Bishopsgate is a specific project that we are doing in partnership with the City of London. We will have to wait and see how that progresses. I take on board your advocacy of those black cab drivers who take disabled passengers. It is a really important issue. One of the reasons there was an Equalities Impact Assessment was to look into that. We will wait and see how the finished scheme addresses some of those concerns and ameliorates them as well.
Navin Shah AM (Chair): MrMayor, that is the end of questions from AssemblyMemberKurten. He is out of time now.

Remediation of private sector and housing association owned tall buildings

Alison Moore: Are you satisfied with the arrangements and amounts available for meeting the cost of the remediation of private sector and housing association owned tall buildings with dangerous cladding; and the progress with such remediation work; and are you concerned about the demands on the LFB to inspect such buildings until remediated?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I have always been clear that there are major failures in the Government’s Building Safety Programme. Since the horrific tragedy at Grenfell Tower, time and time again it has been too little, too late. It took a year to announce the aluminium composite material (ACM) Remediation Fund for social landlords and over two years for private sector tower blocks. Three years on from Grenfell, the Government has now established the Building Safety Fund for the replacement of other types of unsafe cladding. Still, none of those funding programmes protect leaseholders from the eye-watering cost of waking watch, which can cost £500 per household per month. The £1billion Building Safety Fund is simply insufficient to cover all the buildings affected.
While the Government took years to announce three inadequate funding programmes, it has insisted on setting unrealistic deadlines for building owners. The requirement that works start on site before March 2021 is simply unrealistic and must be extended. Today, Chair, an estimated 56,000 people nationally continue to live in buildings with unsafe ACM cladding. Private building owners must also share the responsibility for this lack of pace. I have recently written to London building owners applying for ACM remediation funding who have failed to start remediation work, to emphasise the urgency of starting works as soon as possible.
The London Fire Brigade has inspected over 5,000 high-rise buildings since the Grenfell tragedy. The Fire Safety Bill will clarify the Brigade’s powers to take enforcement action on cladding systems. As you highlight, though, resourcing is a concern. It is imperative that the Government also makes the appropriate funding available to support this enforcement.
Dr Alison Moore AM: Thank you very much, Mayor, for that answer. Statistics out today are showing that nearly 100 private sector tower blocks have still not started remediation, and 59 of those are in London. Is this group of building owners, do you think, simply slow to act or are there more significant barriers that need addressing by the Government before they can begin works?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The observation is a really useful one. Two-thirds of tall buildings in the country are in London. We have way more than anybody else. They are quite complicated in relation to land ownership and issues around management as well. We are speaking to some of the building owners. We are speaking to the Government. I had a meeting with the Minister in relation to how we go forward. Some of it is the delay in having the funding available as well. There is a combination of reasons. You and I are not really that interested in what the reasons are, we just want it solved. We are keen to work with the Government to get these issues solved. I do not want to point fingers necessarily when there are complex issues involved, so it is really important that everyone gets around the table and resolves this. I have to be honest, at the end of the meeting with the Minister, I was more reassured about his commitment to working together to solve this than I was at the outset. Let us make sure we get some progress in this area.
Dr Alison Moore AM: Thank you very much. Just very briefly, moving on, research that has been conducted shows that the London Fire Brigade (LFB) spend over 4,000 person hours a month attending safety visits in high rise properties where ‘stay put’ has been suspended. That has a real impact. Do you agree that the Government should consider the extra burdens carried by the LFB in its funding settlement, particularly given the threat of £25million cuts to the Brigade in your Draft Budget?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Absolutely, it is crucial. We need this in the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), otherwise some of the progress we have made over the last few years will be lost. You will be aware, DrMoore, of the cuts made between 2008 and 2016 to our fire service, particularly post-2010. We cannot afford for that to happen again, particularly when there are additional burdens on our fire service that need to be met. I will be asking the Government to support the fire service in the budget and also in the CSR as well.
Dr Alison Moore AM: Thank you very much. Time is tight, so I will leave it there. Thank you very much.

The Current State of London's Economy

Shaun Bailey: What is your latest assessment of the current state of London’s economy?

Sadiq Khan: London’s economy has been hit hard by the pandemic. The collapse in global economic activity and national lockdown restrictions pushed most indicators for London’s economy to historic lows in late March and April. As a result, output in the second quarter of 2020 is estimated to be almost a fifth lower than the last quarter of 2019 before the pandemic.
As the restrictions have eased, the capital’s economy has gradually started to recover. However, London’s economy is still well below where it was before the crisis and the future remains uncertain. As I said, Chair, nearly 1.4million jobs have been furloughed, around a third of those eligible. I have repeatedly lobbied the Government to extend support for jobs in sectors like retail, hospitality, leisure and culture, which cannot operate fully with social distancing, to avoid a sudden hike in unemployment when the scheme ends. London’s Central Activity Zone faces a perfect storm. Homeworking, the need to socially distance, lack of public confidence and the plunge in domestic and international tourism have had a devastating effect on businesses and cultural institutions.
I have written to the Prime Minister and the Chancellor [of the Exchequer], calling on the Government to support London’s economy with a range of interventions including an extension of the current business rates holiday for retail, hospitality and leisure businesses to next year, but I have yet to receive a response.
Looking further ahead, GLA Economics estimates show that it is unlikely that London’s economy will return to pre-crisis levels before late 2022 at the earliest. Employment is expected to take even longer than that. The speed of the recovery will not only depend on economic policies but also and especially on the effective controlling of the virus’s spread. There is also great uncertainty ahead. Like the rest of us, businesses are concerned about a possible COVID second wave, further austerity and a no-deal Brexit, the risk of which appears to be increasing with a Government prepared to break international law.
I have commissioned, Chair, a major piece of research into the long-term impact of the crisis on the Central Activity Zone. No one can be certain what the new normal for the city centres around the world will be, but this research will provide the evidence into the emerging trends, risks and opportunities so that we can plan for the future to best protect London’s economy and global competitiveness.

Shaun Bailey: Thank you for your answer, MrMayor. At the last two Economy Committee meetings, both of your Deputy Mayors [for Business and for Social Integration, Social Mobility and Community Engagement] have said that we will be getting an Economic Recovery Strategy from your office. When can we expect to see that and can you give us a flavour of what it might cover?

Sadiq Khan: We are working with the Transition Board that [The Rt Hon] RobertJenrick [MP, Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government] and I chair and also the Recovery Board chaired by the Chair of London Councils. They have set up eight missions. There is business representation on there, just to reassure you, from London First, the Confederation of British Industries (CBI), the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) and others from small business across London. They are working on an economic strategy to do with recovery that uses eight missions. That is work in progress.
One of the reasons why I am keen to have this piece of research done is, as you will be aware, if you look at businesses in central London, whether the West End or Canary Wharf, the footfall is really important. A live question we have is not simply about how much realistically people can return to offices with social distancing but about the emerging trends going forward so that we can turn risks into opportunities. As soon as that work is done, I will be very happy, Chair, to share it with the Assembly.

Shaun Bailey: Thank you. There are strategies coming from the Recovery Board, not from the Mayor’s office?

Sadiq Khan: Yes. It is very important to work collegiately with colleagues across London. It really is not just City Hall’s work. It is City Hall working with central Government, local government, the public sector, the private sector and - you will be pleased to know - civic society as well, which has lot of expertise in relation to the experience they have as well.

Shaun Bailey: That makes sense. Any delivery date? Any time they will‑‑

Sadiq Khan: We meet every two months, but in between the meetings there are various subgroups. There is, Chair, an Economic Taskforce and I am really happy for the Chair of that to write to the Member. Bearing in mind the work that the City Hall’s Assembly Committee is doing, I am really happy to feed into that as well. I will undertake to get a letter written to the AssemblyMember to give him an idea of timelines and any outputs as well.

Shaun Bailey: Thank you. You talked about GLA Economics’ studies and there is one in particular that says that the gross value added of London could be as low as -16.8. It strikes me that one of the ways of combatting that would be to encourage Londoners who can come back to work in a COVID-safe environment and in a safe way to do so.
How much work is being done by the GLA to encourage people to come back to work if possible?

Sadiq Khan: We have been hamstrung by the confused comms and mixed messaging from the Government on this. I have to be honest. Two weeks ago, the Government began the week with a back-to-work campaign. By the Thursday, Number10 said that there was no back-to-work campaign. I checked this morning and have been told that the Prime Minister’s advice to go back to work if you can has been dropped from Government messaging. If he is aware of what the Government advice is, can he share it with me? I do not know what it is.

Shaun Bailey: What are you doing? What is your view of what Londoners should be doing to come back to work? Of course you are very pivotal. You have a vital role to build confidence in making that journey, encouraging employers to provide an environment that is safe to work in. Are you - the GLA, your office - speaking to employers and to employees to make that journey? What are you doing?

Sadiq Khan: Employers, like me, are confused by what the Government wants us to do. The Government has access, unlike you and me, to the advice from the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE). The Government has access to a number of pieces of advice that you I do not, nor do employees. What the Government needs to be doing is providing clarity.
We are trying to provide clarity in the absence of clarity from the Government. We are working with employers to make sure that they are providing places of work that are safe. One of the reasons the Chair referred to nine being the maximum number of AssemblyMembers who can be here is because we have carried out risk audits. We are saying to employers - and employers are being brilliant across London - “Please make sure you carry out risk assessments to find out the maximum number”.
One of the pieces we are doing with employers across the Central Activity Zone is for them to let us know what a realistic number is to return to work. One of the things that does not work is expecting 100% of people to return to work. Looking around this Mayor’s Question Time, we know that is not possible. Similarly, it is not possible for businesses in Canary Wharf and the West End, which has an impact on retailers, culture, leisure and hospitality, which is one of the reasons why we are asking the Government to extend the furlough scheme in those particular sectors.
As far as my message to Londoners, it is really important that if you are going to work and using public transport, avoid the rush hour. Wear a facemask at all times when you are indoors like in a shop or on public transport. Carry hand sanitiser. Use the hand sanitising points we have available in public transport. We are saying to employers to stagger their start times and their finish times to avoid peaks at rush hour start times and end times.
We are doing lots of work through our channels with employers across London. What they are calling out for is clarity from central Government and it is really important that there are not mixed messages and confused comms.

Navin Shah: MrMayor, I have two follow-up questions on this one. The first one is from AssemblyMemberCooper.

Promoting a four-day working week

Siân Berry: Do you support the principle of more London businesses moving to a four-day working week, where this can help retain jobs and reduce overcrowding on our roads and public transport, during the current crisis?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am an advocate of flexible working and promote it through the Good Work Standard. I have led by example in encouraging flexible practices and increasing flexible working options across the GLA. The idea of a four-day working week can mean different things. For example, some colleagues here at the GLA work compressed hours, fitting in their full working hours over four days, one of many flexible working options that I am proud that the GLA offers to staff.
I know that many campaigners are keen that we move to a 28/30 hour working week over four days. It is an interesting idea, especially in the context of our economic recovery from the pandemic. For many people, the way we work will change. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown us that people can still be productive, whether in the office or at home. Working flexible hours has also played an important role in enabling people to keep working. As long as social distancing rules are in place, there is a limit to how many people can safely return to workplaces. Employers will need to continue to support a wide range of flexibilities.
As I have said, flexible working can take many forms, but what is important is that it must bring benefits to both the employer and employee. I am concerned that too often in the gig economy and in zero-hours contracts, what we see is flexibility works for the employer but does not offer security or a guaranteed income for the worker. We also need to continue support for Londoners who cannot work or are on reduced hours because of the pandemic.

Siân Berry: Thank you very much, MrMayor. I have five seconds left to say thank you very much. The public do support this measure coming in. I know that we, as Greens, have put forward some amendments to explore it in the GLA, so we can be a leader on this. I hope we can keep talking about a four-day week.

BAME recruitment in Metropolitan Police Service

Florence Eshalomi: What can be done to recruit more BAME officers into the Metropolitan Police Service?

Sadiq Khan: Effective policing relies on the trust, confidence and consent of the public. As such, the MPS must be representative of the people who live and work in this global city. All of London’s diverse community should be able to see that it is their police service.
I have asked Deputy Mayor for Policing, SophieLinden, and DrDebbieWeekes-Bernard [Deputy Mayor for Social Integration, Social Mobility and Community Engagement] to develop an Action Plan on Trust and Confidence to tackle these vital tasks. This work has shown very clearly that diversity and inclusion remains a key concern for Londoners. We have made some progress over the last few years. Twenty years ago, for example, just 3% of MPS officers were from BAME backgrounds; today the figure is over 15%. This is still far from where I want us to be and I know that for many Londoners this progress will have felt very slow. To try to make more progress faster, the MPS is now actively targeting BAME recruitment and has transformed its attraction and recruitment processes, running targeted marketing campaigns, opening up new recruitment pathways, using local officers to act as positive role models and mentors, launching online information portals, and working with the College of Policing to tackle disproportionality within the national recruitment assessment process. I have also had discussions with the Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis] about reintroducing the London residency criteria for new recruits in some form as soon as possible.
These efforts are welcome but we need to accelerate the pace of change, which is why key parts of the Action Plan on Trust and Confidence will be a focus on ensuring that our police service represents black Londoners. Crucially, I want to see communities involved in the recruitment and training of new officers and a renewed focus from the MPS, not just on diversity in recruitment but on retention and progression. This is happening against a background of uncertainty around Government funding for future recruitment. It is important that we get the funding resolved so that we can continue to work to recruit a police force that represents the Londoners it serves.

Florence Eshalomi: Thank you, MrMayor. It is really good to hear that there is some progress on this.
On those figures that you quoted, we see the MPS making some improvement where 14% of the officers come from a BAME background. However, when you delve in deeper only 3.4% are from the black community - not BAME, black - in comparison to 12.4% of black Londoners. Therefore, as a whole, there is still a lot more to be done.
Recently, at the MPS we have had senior MPS officers say that they think a radical and different approach needs to be taken, similar to the approach in Northern Ireland. Do you think that approach in the initial recruitment stage could help the MPS in addressing these figures?

Sadiq Khan: I do, but it would be unlawful. I have looked into this, both in my previous life and also now. One of the challenges is that we do not have the same freedom that Northern Ireland had with legislation. The Equalities Act does not cover Northern Ireland. You will be aware post the Good Friday Agreement part of what the Northern Ireland Police service did was to have a 50/50 approach. We could not do that in our country - in England, in London - because legislation prohibits us to do so. Instead, we are talking to the Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis] about using the equal merit provisions, which is allowed under the Equality Act. That is one of the things we are exploring with the Commissioner in the Action Plan we are working on.
To reassure you, AssemblyMemberEshalomi [MP], this is really important to me. You are right, when you look below the figures it is black Londoners who have the least trust and confidence in the police and it is with black Londoners where we have not made the progress we really need to make in relation to giving them the confidence, help and support to join the police service and then to progress in the police service as well.

Florence Eshalomi: On that point of progression, we see a high proportion of black Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) in London. They make up 14% of PCSOs, which again we should definitely welcome. PCSOs provide a valuable service to the police and in reassuring the community. A lot of them know the community so well. Is there any work that the MPS is doing to make sure those PCSOs then make the transition into full officers? I think this is something that would definitely help in terms of increasing representation. Is there anything you are aware of, or is there more that the MPS could be doing?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, the MPS and the Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis] deserves credit for this and they are working really hard. There is a larger number of BAME staff in the police staff, PCSOs and Special Constables. One of the things the MPS under this Commissioner has tried to do is see if those three places can be, if you like, ‘feeders’ into the MPS, and will continue to take efforts to do that. That is as well as all the other stuff we need to do to try to increase recruitment to the MPS as officers. One of the pools we are looking at is not just PCSOs but police staff and Special Constables as well.

Florence Eshalomi: Thank you, Chair. I will leave it there.

Supporting London’s workers

Joanne McCartney: The government’s furlough scheme is currently planned to close by the end of October. Currently 32% of all eligible employments in London have been furloughed, disproportionally affecting the most disadvantaged communities. What more does the government need to do to ensure that London’s workers are protected, and our economy supported?

Sadiq Khan: London has almost 1.4million furloughed workers, the highest volume of all regions, with 14% of the total furloughed. The support is set to end and I am deeply concerned that many Londoners on low wages and from BAME backgrounds will suffer deepening economic hardship as a result of widespread redundancies over the next few months. I have been speaking, as I regularly do, with London businesses and, for many sectors, it is simply too early for Government support to be withdrawn.
Once again, Britain is falling behind our European counterparts by failing to provide more comprehensive support when it is needed. France, Germany and Belgium are among those to extend their support, but in the UK support has been tapering since August and at the end of October the scheme is set to end. The Treasury clearly wants to move on, but I cannot see how that is possible with the threat of a second wave growing by the day and social distancing set to continue for some time to come.
As you note, AssemblyMemberMcCartney, one third of eligible employees have been furloughed in London. Young people are most likely to be furloughed along with workers over 60. Take-up was highest in the most deprived areas of London and those with higher BAME communities. If the scheme does end as planned, the potential burden of unemployment will fall on London’s poorest areas and its most disadvantaged residents.
I have highlighted the needs of those sectors hardest hit by COVID-19 such as retail, culture and hospitality. We cannot expect footfall to return to pre-pandemic levels in the foreseeable future. The economic case for protecting businesses is overwhelming and support must also be offered to freelancers and the self-employed.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you, MrMayor. You are quite right that it is those most deprived communities that will be burdened with the effects of rising unemployment. That is communities such as mine in Tottenham and Edmonton. In Tottenham, for example, there are 32,500 workers currently furloughed. If the furlough scheme is not extended, many of those workers will lose their jobs. It is those communities that will suffer the most.
In your conversations with the Government, do you get the sense that it understands the human cost of this? Are you hopeful that it will put in some further measures to alleviate this problem?

Sadiq Khan: Thank you for your question. You cannot but notice the human cost of the pandemic and also the misery caused to families who have been made unemployed and the impact of redundancy on not just the person who loses a job but families as well affected by that. You and I both lived through the massive unemployment of the 1980s and we saw not simply a generation written off but the life chances of families written off.
I am hopeful that the Chancellor [of the Exchequer] will come forward with a new scheme as the furlough scheme ends at the end of October [2020]. What I have tried to get across to the Treasury is the examples of what Germany, France, Belgium and many others are doing. Some countries are giving support until 2022, some until the end of 2021 and some until the end of 2020. Very few are allowing the possibility of a cliff-edge fall with a lack of support for families.
I hope they do. It would be pretty inhumane of them not to. All of us should use whatever influence we have to persuade the Government to do right by vulnerable communities affected by COVID-19.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you for that answer. What more can City Hall do? Are the Government’s schemes - for example, the Kickstart scheme to help young unemployed people - using the GLA and the contacts and abilities that this organisation has to make that targeted difference or not?

Sadiq Khan: We are offering our assistance to the Government to help in any way we can. You will be aware that we worked really closely with the Government in relation to homelessness during COVID-19. We are really keen to work with the Government in relation to issues around jobs to avoid mass unemployment and also in areas where we can reskill people quickly to get them back into work. One of the best ways to help people if they are in danger of losing their jobs is to skill them up to get another job that is futureproofed, hopefully, before they lose their first job or become long-term unemployed.
We are doing things ourselves - grants, loans, advertising campaigns, rent relief for businesses - and at the same time continuing to offer up to the Government our expertise and willingness to support in this area. It is a really important area. We think we know our communities and our sectors across London best. Councils know their local micro-economies really well. We are trying to use the Transition Board, chaired by [The Rt Hon] RobertJenrick [MP, Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government] and me, and the Recovery Board, chaired by the Chair of London Councils and me, as ways to get the Government to work with us to get the best result for Londoners, which is a win-win for everyone.

Planning system changes and the impact on the high street

Nicky Gavron: Do you think that the introduction this month of use-class E, that amalgamates a range of other use-classes without going through the planning system, is a good response to the issues that London high-streets have faced including issues resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic?

The Mayor: Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): London’s high streets and town centres are vitally important to Londoners. The impacts of the pandemic mean that we have all been relying on the crucial shops, cafés and services on our local high streets. Meaningful support for individual high streets in town centres must be tailored to the unique circumstances. The needs of Oxford Street and the right mix of uses that will make it successful are not the same as the needs for Surbiton or Stockwell.
The Government’s new Use Class E has removed the ability of local authorities to have any influence over the change of use of commercial premises through the planning system.
This means that any shop could be converted to an office, or any nursery or general practitioner (GP) surgery could change to an estate agent. This could have major implications for our high streets and is completely untried and untested. The Government’s own Impact Assessment identifies a risk that some smaller businesses will be squeezed out by other uses that can afford higher rents. It justifies this, and I quote, “creative destruction”, claiming that new businesses will be more productive. I have written jointly with [Councillor] Darren Rodwell, London Council’s Executive Member for Housing and Planning, to the Secretary of State [for Housing, Communities and Local Government] spelling out our concerns about these changes.
Nicky Gavron AM: Thank you, MrMayor, for that very comprehensive answer. I share with you your concerns. I do not know how many people know - you spelled out some of it - any use can replace any one of these uses: professional business services, offices, other businesses, shops, cafes, health centres, gyms, and even nurseries, as you said. The feedback from business is that they are just trying to survive on the high street. Would you agree that the Government, rather than bringing in these changes, should be looking at the special pressures that London’s businesses on the high streets right across London are facing, not bringing in a free-for-all on our high streets?

Sadiq Khan: Absolutely. You have to distinguish two groups: building occupiers, who are really struggling, who need some flexibility and who need a lot of assistance; and building owners, who would benefit from often taking in people who can pay a higher rent, who may not be what the local community needs and may be something local council will have a view on.
The Government has missed a trick here. What the Government should be doing is giving greater flexibility to building occupiers. We often meet businesses who are frustrated about what they see as the bureaucracy of the local town hall. More flexibility there is a good thing. This is completely spoiling the ability of councillors and local communities to have a say over their local high street and their local environment. It really has an impact on the heritage of many parts of our city.
Nicky Gavron AM: Thank you for that. We are already losing diversity on the high street. What we are getting now, what these changes mean, is that the market is going to shape the way our high streets look and what we can find there, in terms of services and so on. We could be in a situation where you have a high street with no baker, no butcher, and three gyms. As you say, local authorities have no control. In this case, there are no sanctions, no prior approvals, no Article4 directions, and no exemptions.
I want you to spell out a bit more what your concern is about local authorities losing democratic control and citizens not having any way that they can now protect and campaign for what they need on their high streets. What do you feel, if anything, you can do about it?

Sadiq Khan: Thank you for your question. This is the exact opposite of the localisation that this Government talked about and it is the very opposite of “Whitehall knows best”, which this Government said they were against when they were campaigning in the General Election. This is about local people, locally elected councillors, losing any voice in what happens on their high street.
The phrase “creative destruction” is talking about people’s livelihoods. Often these are independent traders, family businesses, who are going to struggle. Also, potentially, nurseries and GP surgeries, who may not be paying the same high rents as other potential businesses, who will be lost from the high street. It is also against what our London Plan talked about: this close proximity to where people live, work, play, and rest; not having long journeys or dormitory corridors across our city. It is going back to some of the mistakes made in previous decades, with people having to drive from their home to a shop they want to go to or a place they want to visit.
One of the strengths of locally elected councillors having a say in what happens in their high street is you have these little villages across our city. Yes, we are a global city, but we are a global city within which there are 400 or so villages. If we are not careful, AssemblyMemberGavron, we will be a clone city, which will be an identikit to cities across the country, with town centres identikit to town centres across the country as well. That would be a real mistake.
Nicky Gavron AM: That is a very, very comprehensive answer. You have hit the nail on the head with that answer. Are you going to being monitoring in any way the impacts, so that we can feed back to Government what the impacts are of not so creative destruction?

Sadiq Khan: Yes. The good news is that this is cross party, in relation to the local Government and myself lobbying the Government. The bad news is, Nicky, if these changes happen, the Use Class E changes have brought in from September [2020]. Once that business has gone, it has gone. You will know how hard it is to start a business. It is far easier to keep a business afloat than if it goes and has to start again. That is why we will continue to lobby. Any influence Members of the Assembly have on the Government would be greatly appreciated by businesses and communities across the city.
Nicky Gavron AM: We all will be lobbying with you. Thank you.

Impact of the End of the EU Transition Period on London

Leonie Cooper: News from the UK/EU Brexit negotiations shows a lack of progress has been made and we are running out of time to allow businesses to prepare for upcoming rule changes. How will you make sure Londoners voices are heard in the ongoing Brexit negotiations between the UK and the EU?

Sadiq Khan: COVID-19 has triggered the most far‑reaching public health and economic emergency since the Second World War. We are now facing a possible second wave and all the devastation that will bring. It would therefore be the worst possible moment for the Government to choose to inflict a further economic shock on our country, whether it be through the feeblest trade deal imaginable or the no‑deal Brexit that some in this Government crave.
That is why last week I wrote to the Prime Minister urging him to seek a 12‑month extension to our current transition arrangements that keep us in the single market and customs union if the latest round of trade negotiations end that progress once again. In my letter I laid out the longer‑term disastrous consequences for London should the Government fail to secure a trade deal, 87,000 fewer trades by 2030, on top of the catastrophic impact of COVID-19 on jobs, incomes and livelihoods. Extending the transition period will allow time for a vaccine to be developed. It would also enable the Government to focus 100% on tackling COVID-19 with a fully‑functioning test, trace and isolate system.
Your question rightly notes that we are running out of time for businesses to adjust to whatever comes next. Businesses and public services are already grappling with the impacts of the pandemic. This is the worst possible time to impose pointless new red tape on London businesses that import, export or need access to talent. This is not about whether people supported remaining in the EU or leaving. The debate is over, we have left. This is about doing the right thing and putting British interests ahead of party posturing and political dogma at a moment of acute national crisis that could still escalate further in the days, weeks and months to come.

Léonie Cooper: Thank you very much, MrMayor. It seems that the PrimeMinister’s “oven-ready” deal has vanished. We have just heard [The Rt Hon] BrandonLewis [MP, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland] talk about breaking international law in a specific and limited way. That has then resulted in officials having to dash to Europe, and The Rt Hon] Dominic Raab [MP, Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs], is now in the United States (US) trying to sort things out. Do you share my concern that disregard of international law could damage London’s reputation as well as the country’s reputation and that international business may be less willing to invest in London if the Government carries out this threat?

Sadiq Khan: Absolutely. I can speak from personal experience; our courts and our judges are renowned around the world. Our judges cannot be corrupted and are impartial. Our courts are known as being fair and as upholding the rule of law. The impact on our reputation cannot be underestimated.
There are not many things that unite [The Rt Hon] TheresaMay [MP, former Prime Minister], [The Rt Hon] DavidCameron [former Prime Minister], [The Rt Hon] GordonBrown [former Prime Minister], [The Rt Hon] TonyBlair [former Prime Minister] and [The Rt Hon Sir] JohnMajor [former Prime Minister], but [The Rt Hon] BorisJohnson [MP, Prime Minister] has managed to unite all of them in their opposition to the Government breaching international law. Also, do not be surprised if you have people behaving in way that disrespects the law because they see our Prime Minister condoning breaking of the law, and not just condoning it, actually legislating to enable the law to be broken. Whether it is with or without the approval of Members of Parliament (MPs) does not matter; breaking the law is breaking the law. I think it sets a dangerous precedent. It is one of the reasons why - even though we may not have huge influence vis-à-vis our economic trading, bearing the size of our country, outside the EU - we have a huge reputation for the positive in relation to our values and our norms, and I worry about the precedent this sets.
This is more about a bygone era that I am proud of, that we should be talking about. This thing about British values we should be talking about, rather than statues.

Léonie Cooper: Thank you, MrMayor. Obviously we are leaving, as you rightly pointed out. Unless the Government gets a good grip of these negotiations, we are going to either end up with no deal or a very bad deal.
In October2019, almost a year ago, you conducted research that showed some of the problems that Brexit might cause to London’s economy. We are now in new territory with the combination of COVID-19 with Brexit. Will there be new research done by City Hall to understand how the twin shocks of COVID-19 and Brexit will be impacting together on London’s economy?

Sadiq Khan: We have no plans at the moment to do further research. However, you are right, the research we did last year was pretty devastating on a no‑deal Brexit: across the country, 500,000 fewer jobs to 2030 and £50billion less investment. Imagine that on top of the consequences of COVID-19. I talked in answer to a previous question about employment levels in London not reaching pre-COVID levels until 2022. This emphasises the reason why it is important for the Government to do a deal. Time is running out. They have to do a deal by the end of October, for the reasons you have said. It is really important, in my view - because the Government’s bandwidth is occupied by COVID-19, as it rightly should be - the Government tries to get an extension to avoid a cliff‑edge fall.

Léonie Cooper: Thank you very much, MrMayor.

Navin Shah: AssemblyMemberDuvall has a follow‑up question.

Reducing ozone pollution in London

Caroline Russell: In mid-August, London saw the most serious ozone air pollution episode in London since 2006. Defra says ozone behaves like nitrogen dioxide: “it irritates the airways of the lungs, increasing the symptoms of those suffering from lung diseases.” How are you reducing Londoners’ exposure to ozone?

Sadiq Khan: You are right, AssemblyMemberRussell, to note that this August [2020] London experienced high levels of ozone, driven by strong sunshine and unusually high temperatures. To help reduce Londoners’ exposure during this period, I issued a high air pollution alert. My alert system helps Londoners by giving them advanced warning of moderate and high pollution incidents and sharing advice from PHE on any precautions vulnerable groups need to take during these episodes.
To reduce the chances of future episodes, I am also working to tackle pollution at its source. Ozone is what is known as a secondary pollutant, meaning it is not directly produced by human activity. Indeed, it is produced by the chemical reaction of other pollutants and sunlight. The main causes of ozone are pollutants omitted by road vehicles and industry, such as NO2.
Our air quality policies have already significantly reduced NOx emissions before the pandemic. The central London ULEZ had reduced road transport NOx emissions in central London by 35% after less than a year in operation. This in turn will reduce the amount of locally produced ozone, lowering levels of this pollutant and the risk to Londoners’ health. I am committed to do more. To control ozone in London, we need to further reduce emissions. Episodes like this highlight that pollution is not just a central London problem. That is why next year I am expanding the central ULEZ up to the North and South Circular Roads. Ozone can travel long distances and a significant proportion of London’s ozone comes from national and international sources. That is why I am calling on the UK Government to match my level of ambition to get the dirtiest vehicles off our roads.

Caroline Russell: Thank you, MrMayor. I welcome your concern about this. London is at risk of more ozone episodes, blanketing our city in hot weather. As you said, it is formed on still days, mainly from traffic pollutants, which are reacting to strong sunshine. We also have the Breathe London data that recently showed that outer London may have worse diesel traffic pollution than inner London. The whole of London needs clean air. Even your expanded ULEZ is going to be a bit too small. Do you agree that the whole of London needs an ULEZ, so no Londoners are left breathing bad air?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): What is important is that we are both realistic and ambitious. We have looked at the possibility of how we can bring in the benefits of ULEZ across London sooner rather than later. You will remember we accelerated, with your support, just to remind colleagues, ULEZ in Central London ahead of schedule for the reasons that we have discussed. We, against opposition, are expanding it to the North and South Circulars. We think it will cover 96% of London’s community. The 4% we think we can better target with other policies. However, if it is the case, when we look back at the expanded ULEZ, that it is not working as much as we would like, I am happy to revisit other policies to get the benefits elsewhere. Maybe with the new advances in technology we will be able to do more. We are going as fast as we can with the technology we have.
Caroline Russell AM: Thank you very much. The problem is not just the emission standards of vehicles, it is also the amount that they are driven every day. The missing link is cutting traffic. Just last week, in this Chamber, your Deputy Mayor for Transport told me that it is wrong that users of public transport are, in effect, subsidising road users’ road maintenance. Does that mean you are going to bring in proper traffic and pollution controlling measures soon, with smart, fair, privacy-friendly road pricing, or are you going to leave that to the next mayor?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Who is the next mayor? Just to deal with the short-term, you will be aware that there are a number of conditions attached to our deal with the Government. One of those was reintroducing Congestion Charge (C-Charge), ULEZ and Low Emission Zone. Another one was to widen the scope of C-Charge, and the level as well.
I have to be frank; I am not sure what conditions the Government is going to attach in relation to the next settlement we will have with the Government. Any discussions and views that I have are contingent on those discussions. My view is our priority has to be to roll out the ULEZ up to the North Circular and to the South Circular to get the benefits of those measures that you and I have talked about: air quality, NOx, fewer schools being in areas where the air is illegal. We are always happy to look at innovation. We are in the innovation business, being both ambitious and realistic. The ULEZ, which is the world’s first and award-winning, is both ambitious and realistic.
Caroline Russell AM: I cannot quite read that. It sounds like you may be discussing road pricing in the discussions with the Government, which are coming out on 30September2020.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I cannot give a running commentary on the discussions we are having.
Caroline Russell AM: OK. I am going to take that as, no, you are not doing road pricing although in your Transport Strategy you said you were going to develop a new, more sophisticated way of paying for road use, and I am quoting here, “Integrating existing and proposed emissions-based and congestion charging schemes”. That was only by 2040. You told AssemblyMemberCooper, just earlier, that you want to comply with WHO limits by 2030. London does need action on smart, fair, privacy-friendly road pricing right now to control that increase in traffic and finally give Londoners the clean air we tasted during lockdown for good. I have no further questions, I am sorry.